At times in Christian thought, the priorities of pure doctrine and passionate mission have been perceived as opposites on a spectrum where emphasis on one results in neglect of the other, but without one, the other is deficient and doomed to crumble. Mission without doctrine is like a body without a skeleton, but apart from mission, doctrine is like dry bones in a museum. A Lutheran Reformission maintains a dual emphasis, resulting in doctrinal missions as well as missional doctrine.

Thursday, August 23, 2012

Q:What does it mean when the
Bible commands against bearing “false witness against your neighbor?”What things does this commandment require
Christians to do and forbid them from doing?

Among the Ten Commandments, this one
(the 8th) is certainly in the running to be considered the most
frequently misunderstood.Some have
paraphrased this commandment as “You shall not lie,” but it is really much more
than that.

The first three commandments deal
with how humans are intended to act toward God, and the fourth through seventh
commandments can be sinned against with thoughts, words, or actions.Now this commandment deals primarily with
our words, and how they relate to other people’s reputation.

It is obvious that this commandment
forbids Christians from lying—not only in formal testimony but also in private
conversation.This would include
repeating untrue things we have heard from others, as well as starting the
untruths ourselves, and it includes all lies, both those told publicly to many
people or privately to only one person.

Not only does this commandment apply
to lies, but also to telling the truth in ways that are harmful.This would include revealing secrets or other
information one has been told with an understandingof confidentiality.It would also include revealing sins or other
unfavorable truths that were previously private or giving even greater
publicity to unfavorable truths that have already been made public about
another person.

In general, Christians should make
every effort not to harm the reputation of other people if it can be
avoided.Private sins and offenses
should be dealt with privately for the preservation of the reputations of
everyone involved.In Matthew 18, Jesus
instructed the people to first go to a person who has sinned against them
privately, then with 2 or three witnesses, and only if all other attempts had
failed to make a matter public.

The only occasion when it would not
be sinful to keep a sin or other unfavorable truth secret is if it is revealed
for the sake of helping the person in question or other people who might
otherwise be endangered if the secret were kept.

Some obvious examples of this would
be when citizens report a crime, children report bullying or other harmful acts
in school, or friends and relatives reveal an addictive behavior or suicidal
intent with the intent of finding help for the person.Even in these cases, though, one is not to
declare such things in public, but rather only to those who have the proper
authority to deal with them, such as law enforcement, teachers, pastors, or
parents.

Another instance in which it might be
not only permissible to make unfavorable truths public is to correct an false
statement that has been made publicly by another.For example, if one businessman has publicly
defamed another, the only way to correct the lie is to make the first man’s sin
public in order to defend the good reputation of the second.

A similar instance comes concerning
religious teaching.If a religious
leader is making public statements or publishing books about God, the Bible, or
religious teaching that are blatantly untrue, not only would it be a faithful
pastor’s option to make this known to the people under his care, and perhaps to
the community at large, but he would be negligent if he became aware of such
statements and failed to do so.

In both cases, the businessman and
the religious leader have made their own sins public, and those seeking to
correct them have no choice but to address them likewise.

In any case, the Bible speaks frequently,
such as the books of James and Proverbs, about the importance of using our
words wisely.We do so when we speak for
the sake of helping others and defending their reputation rather than with the
intent to do them harm.

Thursday, August 9, 2012

My article from today's Algona Upper Des Moines about whether Christians should be pleased with people going to hell:

Q:Why do some Christians seem so
happy to declare that other people are going to hell?Doesn’t Jesus forbid this kind of judging,
and if hell is a real place, wouldn’t it be cruel to be pleased that another
person going there?

The Biblical teaching about eternal
punishment is one that has caused a large amount of distress in recent church
history.Because the reality of the
subject is so horrible, people often find it difficult to deal with, and
unfortunately, they often do so in inappropriate ways.

One inappropriate response to the
Bible’s statements about eternal punishment is to deny its existence.In spite of severe warnings by New Testament
authors about eternal punishment, including very clear statements by Jesus
Himself, about the subject, it has been common, especially during the past
century, to deny that eternal punishment is real.

Some adherents to this position would
cite verses like John 3:16 that “God so loved the world…” and others to deny
that God would ever punish anyone, and thus dismiss the possibility of eternal
punishment.In order to achieve this, it
becomes necessary to consider the Bible verses about eternal punishment to be
inauthentic or to explain them away as meaning something else.

One variation of this position is to
acknowledge the existence of eternal punishment, but insist that only the very
worst tyrants of human history, such as Hitler, Osama bin Laden, or various
serial killers will actually be sentenced to it.The trouble with any denial of eternal
punishment, either in whole or in part, is that for a Christian to hold such a
position, they have no choice but to admit that their position is contradictory
to the position expressed by the Bible’s authors.In addition, it also implies that salvation
is a matter of human behavior rather than a result of Jesus’ sacrifice.

The opposite inappropriate response,
as mentioned in the question, is to defend the reality of eternal punishment to
strongly, that it overshadows the Gospel itself and gives the appearance to the
casual observer that the preacher is pleased that certain individuals will
suffer eternal punishment.

On very rare occasions Christian
groups have arisen that do seem to genuinely take pleasure in the condemnation
of others.Westboro Baptist Church, based
in Topeka, Kansas, has received significant publicity in recent years for
taking just such a stance, as evidenced in their protests at American soldiers’
funerals condemning our nation for allowing various sins that they consider
particularly objectionable in comparison to others.

An appropriate response to the
Bible’s claims regarding eternal punishment by Christians is concern and
sorrow.For a person who claims that the
Bible is a factual account of Christian Truth, it is impossible to deny the
reality of eternal punishment, regardless of how uncomfortable that
acknowledgement is, but the Bible’s claims about it should never result in joy
or pleasure on the part of the Christian.

Instead, it ought to drive Christians
to greater humility concerning their own position before God as forgiven
sinners and greater urgency at making others aware of Jesus and His free gift
of forgiveness as the only remedy for the consequences all people rightly
deserve.Because the Christian
acknowledges that salvation is solely the result of Jesus living and dying as
our substitute, and not at all from anything in himself, it would be completely
inappropriate to take personal pride in one’s salvation while rejoicing in
another’s punishment.

In my work as a pastor, I sincerely
avoid any attempt to judge a person’s unseen thoughts or beliefs, especially
regarding their eternal reward or punishment when this life ends.However, a person’s words and actions are an
indication of what they believe, so Christians can speak concerning what we see
and hear—although never out of pride or by our own standards.

My typical response in such a
circumstance is to say, “Based on what he has said…” or “If he truly believes
the things he has written…” what a person would expect to face in eternity as
already declared by God in Scripture, while at the same time allowing for the
fact that those words or actions may be inconsistent with the beliefs of a
person’s heart, or that the Holy Spirit may intervene during the final minutes
in a way I am not capable of observing.

Lutheranism is more than a cultural identity or a denominational label. In fact, this cultural and institutional baggage may be the primary obstacle in Lutheranism’s path.

To be a Lutheran is not dependent on a code of behavior or a set of common customs. Instead, to be a Lutheran is to receive Jesus in His Word, Body, and Blood for the forgiveness of sins in the Divine Service; and to be bearers of this pure Truth to a broken world corrupted with sin, death, and every lie of the devil and man’s own sinful heart.

While the false and misleading ideas of human religious invention are appealing to sin-blinded minds, they fail when exposed to the realities of life. It is tragic when souls are led to confusion and despair because of the false religious ideas with which they are surrounded. The Biblical doctrine taught by the Apostles and restored at the Reformation holds answers which are relevant regardless of time or place and offers assurance of forgiven sins and eternal life who all who believe its message.

I am a husband, a father, the pastor of St. John’s Lutheran Church (LCMS) in Burt, IA, and track chaplain at Algona Raceway.